president

Madagascar’s parliament has voted to impeach embattled President Andry Rajoelina just hours after he fled the country in the wake of an elite army unit appearing to turn against him and seize power following weeks of deadly Gen Z protests.

The vote on Tuesday afternoon came as Rajoelina moved to dissolve parliament via a decree posted on social media earlier in the day, but which the opposition rejected.

“I have decided to dissolve the National Assembly, in accordance with the Constitution,” Rajoelina posted on X on Tuesday. “This choice is necessary to restore order within our Nation and strengthen democracy. The People must be heard again. Make way for the youth.”

The protests, which initially erupted over power and water shortages, have evolved into the most serious crisis the country and Rajoelina’s government has faced in years. “I was forced to find a safe place to protect my life,” Rajoleina, who did not disclose his location, said in a 26-minute-long live broadcast on Monday after a top army unit, known widely as CAPSAT, reportedly seized the state broadcaster. The same unit announced on Tuesday afternoon that it was “in charge” as parliament concluded the impeachment proceedings.

Rajoleina has not responded to the impeachment and has not renounced his title as head of state. Opposition parties initiated the impeachment vote on charges that Rajoelina “abandoned” his post.

There’s no clear leader in the country.

Madagascar has a long history of political crises and uprisings. Rajoelina’s own apparent exit from the country appeared to be an eerie replay of protests in 2009 that led to the collapse of a previous government, and his ascent to power. However, his government has been accused of corruption and of managing a stagnant economy.

Here’s what to know about how the protests unfolded and the army unit that has turned against the president:

What led to the protests?

Hundreds of angry protesters, led by a young movement called “Gen Z Madagascar,” began taking to the streets of the capital Antananarivo on September 25, with protests over the weekend recording the largest number of demonstrators in the three weeks of unrest.

What began as anger about persistent water and power cuts that leave businesses and homes without electricity or running water for more than 12 hours quickly escalated into frustrations with general governance.

Protesters decried widespread poverty, high costs of living, and state corruption that they say has seen business elites benefit from close contacts in government. Demonstrators began calling for the end of Rajoelina’s 15-year-old government, and for a “free, egalitarian and united society”.

Although Rajoelina sacked his prime minister and attempted a government reshuffle, protesters were not satisfied, culminating in the CAPSAT backing protesters on Saturday in what the president called an “attempt to seize power”. The unit, in a statement, said it refused “orders to shoot” demonstrators.

Some 80 percent of the country’s 31 million people lived in extreme poverty by 2022, according to the World Bank, largely due to political instability and severe climate disasters affecting food supplies. Only a third of the population has access to electricity, according to the International Monetary Fund, with the state-owned energy company, Jirama, accused of corruption and mismanagement.

Angry demonstrators blocked roads with burning tyres and rocks, and reportedly attacked public buildings, transport infrastructure, and private shops. In response, security officials responded with “violent force” according to the United Nations, with reports noting police fired rubber bullets, stun grenades, and tear gas. At least 22 people have died and dozens of others are injured, the UN said in a statement last week, although the government disputed those figures.

Rajoelina ignored calls for his resignation and accused protesters calling for his exit of wanting to “destroy our country.” His attempts to quell the anger by dissolving the government and appointing army General Ruphin Fortunat Zafisambo as the new prime minister on October 6, as well as inviting protesters for talks, were rejected by the demonstrators, who accused the government of ruling “with weapons”.

Who led the protests?

Young protesters, led by the “Gen Z Madagascar” group, started the demonstrations in late September, following similar youth-led uprisings witnessed in the past year in countries like Nepal, Morocco, Kenya, and Bangladesh.

In Madagascar, protesters say they’re demanding an end to 16 years of “inaction” by Rajoelina’s government, and have promised that they will not be silenced.

“They didn’t want to hear us in the streets,” a statement on the Gen Z Madagascar website reads. “Today, thanks to digital technology and the voice of Generation Z, we will make our voices heard at the table of power on the opposition side. To put an end to 16 years of inaction, let’s demand transparency, accountability, and deep reforms.”

The movement highlighted three demands from the government: the immediate resignation of Rajoelina and his government, the dismantling of the Senate, the electoral commission, and the constitutional court, as well as the prosecution of “the businessman close to the president”, referring to Rajoelina’s adviser and businessman, Maminiaina Ravatomanga.

It warned Rajoelina would be dragged to the International Court of Human Rights on various charges ranging from repression to embezzlement if the demands are not met.

The Gen Z Madagascar’s emblem, a flag featuring a pirate skull and crossbones wearing a distinctive Madagascan hat, is a reference to the Japanese comic series, One Piece, which follows a young pirate banding with others to fight an authoritarian government. The flag has become a hallmark of youth-led protests globally. It was raised by Indonesian protesters to show discontent in the run-up to the nation’s independence day in August, as well as by youth protesters who overthrew the Nepal government in September.

Who is President Rajoelina, and where is he?

President Rajoelina’s location is currently unknown. There is speculation that he was flown out of the country on a French military plane, according to French broadcaster RFI, but France has not commented. Madagascar is a former French colony, and Rojoelina is reported to have French citizenship – an issue which has angered some over the years.

In his Facebook statement on Monday evening, the president called for dialogue “to find a way out of this situation” and urged Madagascans to respect the constitution. He did not reveal his location and did not state his resignation.

The move to dissolve the parliament from exile further escalated the crisis and caused confusion, but opposition groups rejected it and voted for the president’s impeachment.

“The legal basis for this is unclear at the moment,” Kenya-based analyst Rose Mumunya told Al Jazeera. “Is he still the president? Legally, he is, but now that the army has announced they are taking over [security institutions], the legality of his decision to dissolve parliament is not really clear,” she said.

The 51-year-old first came to power in 2009 as the leader of a transitional government following a bloodless coup against the former president, Ravalomanana. As an opposition member and mayor of Antananarivo, Rajoelina led weeks of violent protests starting from January 2009 against Ravalomanana, whom he criticised for “restricting freedom” in the country.

Some 130 people died in the crisis. Rabalomanana fled to South Africa in March 2009 following a military coup. Rajoelina’s announcement as leader was ironically backed by CAPSAT. The international community criticised the military intervention and sanctioned Madagascar for years.

Rajoelina was elected in 2019 and re-elected in disputed 2023 polls that were boycotted by the opposition. His government, while popular at first, faced accusations of corruption, increasing repression and rights violations, analysts say. Fired Prime Minister Christian Ntsay and businessman Maminiaina Ravatomanga, were among prominent figures widely criticised in the country. Both arrived in Mauritius on a private flight on Sunday, authorities there said.

What’s CAPSAT, the army unit accused of a coup?

CAPSAT, or the Corps d’administration des personnels et des services administratifs et techniques, is an elite unit based in Soanierana district on the outskirts of Antananarivo. The group’s leader, Colonel Michael Randrianirina announed on Tuesday the unit was “in charge.”

While Rajoelina had influential backers in other important army units, analyst Mumunya noted he has not able to gain such support with CAPSAT.

The unit first appeared to mutiny after members joined thousands of protesters in Antananarivo on Saturday and called for Rajoelina’s resignation. Demonstrators hailed armed CAPSAT members packed in trucks and waving Madagascan flags. There were reports of CAPSAT teams clashing with pro-Rajoelina security forces.

A representative of the contingent said in a video statement on Saturday that “from now on, all orders of the Malagasy army, whether land, air, or navy, will originate from CAPSAT headquarters.” The unit urged all security forces to refuse “orders to shoot” and to stand with protesters.

On the same day, CAPSAT installed a new chief of defense staff, General Demosthene Pikulas, at a ceremony at the army headquarters. Armed Forces Minister Manantsoa Deramasinjaka Rakotoarivelo endorsed the move at the ceremony, saying, “I give him my blessing.”

On Sunday, CAPSAT Colonel Randrianirina told reporters that his unit’s actions did not amount to a coup. “We answered the people’s calls, but it wasn’t a coup d’etat,” he said, speaking at a gathering on Sunday outside the Antananarivo city hall, where large crowds gathered to pray for victims of the violence. One CAPSAT soldier was reportedly killed in a clash with other security units on Saturday.

Madagascar’s military has intervened in politics in several crises since 1960, when the country gained independence from France. Analyst Mumunya said CAPSAT leaders were carefully avoiding an outright coup declaration to avoid international backlash, as in the 2009 revolt. The move by the opposition to impeachment the president would legalise the takeover while the army holds the fort to ensure there’s no counter coup, she said.

“It’s a bit of push and pull between Rajoelina and the army … but the balance of power is not in Rajoelina’s favour,” Mumunya said. “There are likely ongoing negotiations between the political opposition, business elite and security forces to install a new civilian government that will appeal to the youth,” she added.

“So has his government effectively collapsed? I think we can probably conclude that,” she said.

The High Court, where Rajoelina has supporters, analysts say, will likely scrutinise and confirm whether the president can dissolve the parliament from an unknown location, or whether his impeachment can hold.

EXPLAINER

FIFA boss Gianni Infantino was among attendees in Egypt, continuing a string of appearances with the US president Donald Trump.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s participation in Summit for Peace held in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt on Monday may have been a surprise to those who were expecting only world leaders, presidents and high-ranking officials to be in attendance at the Red Sea resort town.

Infantino was photographed next to the co-chair of the event, United States President Donald Trump, in the latest joint appearance by the pair during the second Trump presidency.

Here is all to know about Infantino’s presence in Egypt:

Why was FIFA president at the Egypt Peace summit?

Infantino stated that Trump had invited him to the Summit for Peace and that “FIFA is here to help, to assist and to put ourselves at disposal for whatever we can do to make sure that this peace process comes to fruition and to the best possible end.”

His invitation followed the FIFA president becoming more vocal on the Israel-Gaza conflict in recent days.

Last week, he called for football to support efforts towards peace in the Middle East in the lead-up to two World Cup qualifiers that involved Israel, after pro-Palestinian demonstrations were planned at stadiums in Norway and Italy.

After Friday’s Israel-Hamas ceasefire announcement, Infantino praised the US-brokered plan and singled out Trump to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.

“The role of President Trump has been absolutely fundamental and crucial in the process. Without President Trump, there would be no peace,” he said.

What role did Infantino play at the Summit for Peace?

In Sharm el Sheikh, the FIFA president stressed football’s important role in creating new hope in the Middle East region.

Infantino pledged the governing body’s support to rebuild football infrastructure in Gaza as part of wider post-war reconstruction efforts following Monday’s peace summit.

“Football’s role has to be to support, has to be to unite, has to be to give hope in the region. In Gaza, in Palestine, we will, of course, help to rebuild all the football facilities. We will help to bring football back – together with the Palestinian Football Association – in every corner of the country. We will bring (footballs), we will build pitches, we will bring instructors, we will help organise competitions, we will launch a fund to help rebuild football infrastructure in Palestine,” he announced.

Infantino added that FIFA would contribute with mini-pitches and “FIFA arenas” and invite other partners to join the effort, saying “football brings hope to children, and it’s very, very important.”

What is the relationship between Infantino and Trump?

Trump first met Infantino at the White House in 2018, during his first presidential term, after the US was awarded the co-hosting rights to the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

They have appeared at summits together before; in 2020, they shared the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. It was during this summit that Infantino first called Trump “my great friend”, according to reporting by The Washington Post.

The pair remained in contact when Trump left office in early 2021, but since the second Trump presidency, which coincided with June’s FIFA Club World Cup staged in the US, Infantino has been seen repeatedly with the US president.

Most recently, on August 22, Infantino was filmed inside the Oval Office after he gifted a gold replica World Cup trophy to Trump.

In late 2024, Infantino relocated to Trump’s hometown in Miami due to his North American-based World Cup commitments, ensuring the two friends have easy access for any joint public appearances in the future.

Andry Rajoelina’s announcement on Monday followed reports that he had been evacuated by a French aircraft on Sunday.

President Andry Rajoelina has fled Madagascar to protect his life amid nationwide protests, which began late last month.

Rajoelina confirmed in a live Facebook address on Monday that he had travelled to a safe location following reports and rumours that he had been flown out of the country on Sunday.

The 51-year-old did not disclose his whereabouts.

Rajoelina had been due to give a television address on Monday afternoon, but the speech was delayed after “a group of armed forces threatened to take control of the state-owned media”, Rajoelina’s office said on Facebook.

On Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron expressed concern over the situation in his country’s former colony, where the United Nations says at least 22 people have been killed in clashes between protesters and security forces.

Speaking from a summit in Egypt, Macron refused to comment on whether Rajoelina had been evacuated by France.

“I will not confirm anything today,” he said. “I just wish to express our great concern.”

A military source told the Reuters news agency that Rajoelina left Madagascar on Sunday on board a French Army Casa aircraft, after being brought to the Sainte Marie Airport by helicopter.

The president’s reported departure came after army units defected on Saturday, with Rajoelina condemning the move as “an attempt to seize power illegally and by force”.

Hours after his comments, the army’s elite CAPSAT unit, which played an important role in first bringing Rajoelina to power in a 2009 coup, said it had taken control of the country’s military. Earlier, it had announced that it would “refuse orders to shoot” demonstrators.

Protests in Madagascar began on September 25 over water and power outages, but they soon gave rise to wider grievances over the cost of living, poverty and alleged government corruption, with many demanding Rajoelina’s resignation.

On Monday, hundreds of protesters – joined by soldiers and security forces – gathered outside the city hall in Antananarivo, Madagascar’s capital, waving flags and chanting slogans.

One of the protesters, 24-year-old Finaritra Manitra Andrianamelasoa, told the AFP news agency that he hopes the president “will apologise and genuinely announce his resignation”.

“Afterwards, we can consider organising elections and determine who will be suitable to take the leadership role,” Andrianamelasoa added.

The demonstrations in Madagascar follow a global trend of Gen Z protest movements, including in Nepal, which led to the removal of Nepalese President KP Sharma Oli in early September.

Oct. 13 (UPI) — Madagascar’s president has fled the country, according to reports, after thousands of protesters converged on the capital Monday to demand his resignation.

President Andry Rajoelina had been scheduled to address the island nation, which is located off Africa’s southeastern coast, when his office reported a group of soldiers had joined protesters in a threat to seize state television.

While Rajoelina’s whereabouts are unknown, his office said he would be making a speech Monday night. The president has dual French-Malagasy citizenship and was reported to have left the country in a French military aircraft, according to his staff.

Rajoelina, 51, said in a statement Sunday that he wanted to “inform the nation and the international community that an attempt to seize power illegally and by force” had been “initiated.”

On Saturday, Rajoelina’s new prime minister Gen. Ruphin Fortunat Zafisambo said the government was “fully ready to listen and engage in dialogue with all factions — youth, unions or the military.”

Monday’s coup attempt follows two weeks of protests, mostly led by young adults, called Gen Z Mada over alleged corruption, power and water shortages, as well as inflation and unemployment in Madagascar’s capital of Antananarivo.

At least 22 people have been killed and 100 injured since the start of the unrest in September, according to the United Nations. Since Madagascar declared its independence from France in 1960, it has seen several leaders toppled in coups.

“As long as Rajoelina remains in power, we will continue the struggle,” Gen Z Mada wrote in a statement earlier this month. Madagascar’s president responded to the unrest by appointing Zafisambo as prime minister in an effort to stop the anti-government protests.

Summoned last minute by the president of the United States, the world’s most powerful leaders dropped their schedules to fly to Egypt on Monday, where they idled on a stage awaiting Donald Trump’s grand entrance.

They were there to celebrate a significant U.S. diplomatic achievement that has ended hostilities in Gaza after two brutal years of war. But really, they were there for Trump, who took a victory lap for brokering what he called the “greatest deal of them all.”

“Together we’ve achieved what everyone said was impossible, but at long last, we have peace in the Middle East,” Trump told gathered presidents, sheikhs, prime ministers and emirs, arriving in Egypt after addressing the Knesset in Israel. “Nobody thought it could ever get there, and now we’re there.”

“Now, the rebuilding begins — the rebuilding is maybe going to be the easiest part,” Trump said. “I think we’ve done a lot of the hardest part, because the rest comes together. We all know how to rebuild, and we know how to build better than anybody in the world.”

The achievement of a ceasefire in Gaza has earned Trump praise from across the political aisle and from U.S. friends and foes around the world, securing an elusive peace that officials hope will endure long enough to provide space for a wider settlement of Mideast tensions.

Trump’s negotiation of the Abraham Accords in his first term, which saw his administration secure diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco, were a nonpartisan success embraced by the succeeding Biden administration. But it was the Oct. 7 attack on Israel, and the overwhelming response from Israel that followed, that interrupted efforts by President Biden and his team to build on their success.

The Trump administration now hopes to get talks of expanding the Abraham Accords back on track, eyeing new deals between Israel and Lebanon, Syria, and most of all, Saudi Arabia, effectively ending Israel’s isolation from the Arab world.

Yet, while the current Gaza war appears to be over, the greater Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains.

Trump’s diplomatic success halted the deadliest and most destructive war between Israelis and Palestinians in history, making the achievement all the more notable. Yet the record of the conflict shows a pattern of cyclical violence that flares when similar ceasefires are followed by periods of global neglect.

The first phase of Trump’s peace plan saw Israeli defense forces withdraw from half of Gazan territory, followed by the release of the remaining hostages held by Hamas since Oct. 7 in exchange for nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody.

The next phase — Hamas’ disarmament and Gaza’s reconstruction — may not in fact be “the easiest part,” experts say.

“Phase two depends on Trump keeping everyone’s feet to the fire,” said Dennis Ross, a veteran diplomat on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict who served in the George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Obama administrations.

“Israeli withdrawal and reconstruction are tied together,” he added. “The Saudis and Emiratis won’t invest the big sums Trump talked about without it. Otherwise they know this will happen again.”

While the Israeli government voted to approve the conditions of the hostage release, neither side has agreed to later stages of Trump’s plan, which would see Hamas militants granted amnesty for disarming and vowing to remain outside of Palestinian governance going forward.

An apolitical, technocratic council would assume governing responsibilities for an interim period, with an international body, chaired by Trump, overseeing reconstruction of a territory that has seen 90% of its structures destroyed.

President Trump speaks during a summit of world leaders Monday in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt.

(Amr Nabil / Associated Press)

The document, in other words, is not just a concession of defeat by Hamas, but a full and complete surrender that few in the Middle East believe the group will ultimately accept. While Hamas could technically cease to exist, the Muslim Brotherhood — a sprawling political movement throughout the region from which Hamas was born — could end up reviving the group in another form.

In Israel, the success of the next stage — as well as a long-delayed internal investigation into the government failures that led to Oct. 7 — will likely dominate the next election, which could be called for any time next year.

Netanyahu’s domestic polling fluctuated dramatically over the course of the war, and both flanks of Israeli society, from the moderate left to the far right, are expected to exploit the country’s growing war fatigue under his leadership for their own political gain.

Netanyahu’s instinct has been to run to the right in every Israeli election this past decade. But catering to a voting bloc fueling Israel’s settler enterprise in the West Bank — long the more peaceful Palestinian territory, governed by an historically weak Palestinian Authority — runs the risk of spawning another crisis that could quickly upend Trump’s peace effort.

And crises in the West Bank have prompted the resumption of war in Gaza before.

“Israelis will fear Hamas would dominate a Palestinian state, and that is why disarmament of Hamas and reform of the PA are so important. Having Saudi leaders reach out to Israeli public would help,” Ross said.

“The creeping annexation in the West Bank must stop,” Ross added. “The expansion of settlements must stop, and the violence of extremist settlers must stop.”

In the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7, Netanyahu faced broad criticism for a yearslong strategy of disempowering the Palestinian Authority to Hamas’ benefit, preferring a conflict he knew Israel could win over a peace Israel could not control.

So the true fate of Trump’s peace plan may ultimately come down to the type of peace Netanyahu chooses to pursue in the heat of an election year.

“You are committed to this peace,” Netanyahu said Monday, standing alongside Trump in the Knesset. The Israeli prime minister added: “I am committed to this peace.”

“Cigars and champagne, who cares about that?” US President Donald Trump urged Israeli President Isaac Herzog to pardon Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is on trial in three corruption cases. In one case, Netanyahu’s accused of accepting gifts including cigars, jewellery and champagne from businessmen.

Madagascar’s presidency says “an attempt to seize power illegally and by force” is under way, a day after soldiers from an elite military unit joined a youth-led protest against the government.

“In view of the extreme gravity of this situation, the President of the Republic … strongly condemns this attempt at destabilization and calls upon all forces of the nation to unite in defence of constitutional order and national sovereignty,” President Andry Rajoelina’s office said in a statement on Sunday.

The statement did not identify who was behind what it identified as an attempted coup, but members of the elite CAPSAT military unit, which once installed Rajoelina in power, said it has taken over control of the armed forces after three weeks of deadly Gen Z protests.

“From now on, all orders of the Malagasy army – whether land, air or [naval] – will originate from CAPSAT headquarters,” officers from CAPSAT’s administrative and technical contingent said in a video message on Saturday.

It was not clear whether other units of the army would follow the order.

In the face of snowballing protests, Rajoelina faces the gravest political crisis of his rule of the African nation.

So what’s happening in Madagascar? Is this the end for Rajoelina? And what do the Gen Z protesters want?

What’s the latest?

The protests by a group calling itself Gen Z Madagascar have spilled onto the streets for a third week. Saturday witnessed one of the largest protests since the unrest began last month over a range of issues, including a cost of living crisis and corruption.

Addressing crowds of protesters from an armoured vehicle, Colonel Michael Randrianirina of the CAPSAT unit, said on Saturday: “Do we call this a coup? I don’t know yet.”

The CAPSAT officers said they had named General Demosthene Pikulas as the head of the army, a post that has been vacant since its former occupant was appointed minister of the armed forces last week, the AFP news agency reported. However, it was not clear if the posting could be considered official.

There was no immediate response from other units or the existing military command.

On Saturday, a group of soldiers clashed with gendarmes at a barracks before driving into the city to join the Gen Z protesters calling for Rajoelina to step down.

Why are antigovernment protests happening in Madagascar?

On September 25, young protesters started demonstrations against water and electricity shortages, inspired by a wave of Gen Z-led protest movements in countries including Kenya, Indonesia, Morocco, Nepal and Bangladesh.

They soon escalated and snowballed into calling for the end of Rajoelina’s rule, dismantling the Senate and ending privileges for business owners perceived to be close to the president. They also want Rajoelina to apologise for the violence, in which at least 22 people have been killed and more than 100 injured, according to the United Nations.

Madagascar – an island nation off the east coast of Africa with a population of more than 31 million people, 80 percent of whom are affected by severe poverty – has a history of political crises. Several leaders have been forced out in uprisings since it gained independence from France in 1960.

The Gen Z protesters are demanding “radical change to build a free, egalitarian and united society”.

Among the issues they aim to address are systemic corruption, embezzlement of public funds, nepotism, failures in access to basic services and education, and a vibrant democracy.

Rajoelina, 51, first rose to prominence in 2009 after leading protests against the government as the mayor of the capital, Antananarivo, which resulted in a military-backed overthrow of President Marc Ravalomanana.

A military council took power and handed it over to Rajoelina as transitional leader. Later, in 2018, he was elected as president and then again in 2023 when the vote was boycotted by opposition parties.

What’s Gen Z Madagascar?

Gen Z Madagascar’s logo is a pirate skull and crossbones. The image from the Japanese comic series One Piece has become central to the global wave of Gen Z protests and is worn by generally black-clothed demonstrators in Madagascar.

From Kenya to Nepal, this image from the series, which follows the adventures of a young pirate and his crew against an authoritarian government, has come to symbolise the Gen Z movements.

In Madagascar, the image has been personalised by adding a traditional Madagascan hat on the skull.

The group has its own website, a presence on social media platforms and a GoFundMe page to raise money. Their website header reads: “Political movement of young people, by young people, for Madagascar”.

“They didn’t want to hear us in the streets,” the website says. “Today, thanks to digital technology and the voice of Generation Z, we will make our voices heard at the table of power on the opposition side. To put an end to 16 years of inaction, let’s demand transparency, accountability and deep reforms.”

Responding to Rajoelina’s offer for talks, the protesters said in a statement: “We do not reach out to a regime that every day crushes those who stand up for justice. This government talks about dialogue but rules with weapons.”

The Madagascan protesters are being compared to youth-led protest movements in Bangladesh, Nepal and Kenya, which have forced political change. In Nepal, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli was forced to resign after mass protests last month while Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was forced to flee to neighbouring India after a student-led uprising in August 2024.

Across the world, Gen Z, or people below 30, are leading a new wave of protests. Unlike traditional movements, these demonstrations are often organised online, using platforms like TikTok and Discord to spread messages, plan actions and connect with other young people.

From Africa to Asia and Latin America, Gen Z protesters are demonstrating against corruption, economic hardships, climate inaction and social inequality, calling for an overhaul of the system.

What has the government said?

Prime Minister Ruphin Fortunat Zafisambo, speaking on the state-run TVM channel late on Saturday, said the government was “fully ready to listen and engage in dialogue with all factions – youth, unions or the military”.

Zafisambo was appointed by Rajoelina after he dissolved the previous government last week in response to the protests. However, the move failed to assuage public anger.

The army’s chief of staff, General Jocelyn Rakotoson, later made a statement broadcast on local media urging citizens to “assist the security forces in restoring order through dialogue”.

Soldiers from a Madagascar army unit have declared support for the youth-led anti-government protests, urging police to disobey ‘unlawful orders.’ President Andry Rajeolina says an ‘attempted illegal seizure of power’ is under way.

The US president told reporters that the bodies of Israelis who died in captivity in Gaza are ‘being unearthed’.

Israelis held in Gaza by Hamas and other armed groups are slated to “come back” on Monday, United States President Donald Trump said, with 20 living captives and the bodies of 28 others who died in captivity due to be handed over as part of the US-backed ceasefire deal.

Speaking to reporters at the White House late on Friday, Trump said Monday will be “big” as Hamas exchanges all 48 Israeli captives, both living and deceased, for roughly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.

“Some of those bodies are being unearthed right now, as we speak. They’re working on it right now,” Trump said.

“It’s a tragedy. It’s a tragedy,” he said.

Of the living captives still held in Gaza, the US president added, “they’re in some pretty rough places, where only some people know where they are”.

Trump said he plans to travel to Cairo this weekend and separately speak at the Israeli Knesset before returning to the US.

Under the terms of the US-brokered peace deal for Gaza, Hamas agreed to release all captives within 72 hours following the start of a ceasefire.

Israel’s government ratified the ceasefire in the early hours of Friday, and it came into force later in the day. Israeli troops then began to withdraw from areas in Gaza to designated locations, and the countdown began on the 72 hours for Hamas to release captives.

Reports surfaced earlier this week that Hamas may struggle to locate and gather the remains of all the deceased captives, potentially complicating the planned exchange on Monday.

As Palestinians began to return to their war-torn homes on Friday amid the Israeli pullback, key questions about Gaza’s future remain uncertain – including plans for a future Palestinian state.

Trump, however, maintained an optimistic tone about both the first and later phases of his unfolding ceasefire plan.

Both Hamas and Israel, he said, are “all tired of fighting”.

“There is consensus on most of it and some of the details, like anything else, will be worked out,” Trump said.

“Because, you’ll find out that when you’re sitting in a beautiful room in Egypt, you know, it’s easy to work something out,” he said.

“But then sometimes it doesn’t work from a practical standpoint. But for the most part, there’s consensus,” he added.

The US president also appeared to be pleased with support for the deal from the European Union, Iran and Russia, saying that the peace plan will extend “beyond Gaza”.

“This is peace in the Middle East, and it’s a beautiful thing,” he said.

FIA statutes state that the body will “respect the highest standards of governance, transparency and democracy, including anti-corruption functions and procedures”.

FIA rules require it to be neutral in the election process and that it has an obligation to provide “equal treatment between candidates for the FIA’s presidency”.

Mayer declined to comment, while the FIA has not responded to a series of questions from BBC Sport on the matter.

Robert Reid – who resigned as Ben Sulayem’s vice-president of sport in April, citing “a fundamental breakdown in governance standards within motorsport’s global governing body” – wrote earlier this week in a post on LinkedIn, external: “Each presidential candidate must present a full slate, including seven vice-presidents drawn from list of World Council nominees.

“If the incumbent already controls those names in any region through persuasion, pressure or promise, then no challenger can form.

“The process looks democratic, but in practice it locks the door from the inside. It isn’t democracy. It isn’t even unusual. But that doesn’t make it right.”

There is also doubt surrounding the eligibility of Daniel Coen from Costa Rica for the list of world motorsport council nominees, given that members must come from countries that host international motorsport events, which Costa Rica does not.

Coen is Ben Sulayem’s nominee for vice-president for sport representing North America.

WASHINGTON — Sidelined by political appointees, targeted over deep state conspiracies and derided by the president, career public servants have grown used to life in Washington under a constant state of assault.

But President Trump’s latest threat, to withhold back pay due to workers furloughed by an ongoing government shutdown, is adding fresh uncertainty to the beleaguered workforce.

Whether federal workers will ultimately receive retroactive paychecks after the government reopens, Trump told reporters on Tuesday, “really depends on who you’re talking about.” The law requires federal employees receive their expected compensation in the event of a shutdown.

“For the most part, we’re going to take care of our people,” the president said, while adding: “There are some people that really don’t deserve to be taken care of, and we’ll take care of them in a different way.”

It is yet another peril facing public servants, who, according to Trump’s Office of Management and Budget director, Russ Vought, may also be the target of mass layoffs if the shutdown continues.

The government has been shut since Oct. 1, when Republican and Democratic lawmakers came to an impasse over whether to extend government funding at existing levels, or account for a significant increase in healthcare premiums facing millions of Americans at the start of next year.

White House officials say that, on the one hand, Democrats are to blame for extending a shutdown that will give the administration no other choice but to initiate firings of agency employees working on “nonessential” projects. On the other hand, the president has referred to the moment as an opportunity to root out Democrats working in career roles throughout the federal system.

Legal scholars and public policy experts have roundly dismissed Trump’s latest efforts — both to use the shutdown as a predicate to cut the workforce, and to withhold back pay — as plainly illegal.

And Democrats in Congress, who continue to vote against reopening the government, are counting on them being right, hoping that courts will reject the administration’s moves while they attempt to secure an extension of healthcare tax credits in the shutdown negotiations.

If the experts are wrong, thousands of government workers could face a profound cost.

“Senior leaders of the Trump administration promised to put federal employees in trauma, and they certainly seem intent on keeping that promise,” said Don Moynihan, a professor at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy.

“According to a law that Trump himself has signed, furloughed employees are entitled to back pay,” Moynihan said. “There is no real ambiguity about this, and the idea only some employees in agencies that Trump likes would receive back pay is an illegal abuse of presidential power.”

A day after the shutdown began, Trump wrote on social media that he planned on meeting with Vought, “of Project 2025 fame,” to discuss what he called the “unprecedented opportunity” of making “permanent” cuts to agencies during the ongoing funding lapse.

A lawsuit brought in California against Vought and the OMB, by a coalition of labor unions representing over 2 million federal workers, is challenging the premise of that claim, arguing the government is “deviating from historic practice and violating applicable laws” by using government employees “as a pawn in congressional deliberations.” But whether courts can or will stop the effort is unclear.

Sen. John Thune, the majority leader and a Republican from South Dakota, said last week that Democrats should have known the risk they were running by “shutting down the government and handing the keys to Russ Vought.”

“We don’t control what he’s going to do,” he told Politico.

The White House has sent mixed messages on its willingness to negotiate with Democrats since the shutdown began. Within a matter of hours earlier this week, the president’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters that there was nothing to negotiate, before Trump said that dialogue had opened with Democratic leadership over a potential agreement on healthcare.

Donald Kettl, professor emeritus and former dean at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, taught and trained prospective public servants for 45 years.

“What is happening is profoundly discouraging for young students seeking careers in the federal public service,” he said. “Many of the students are going to state and local governments, nonprofits, and think tanks, but increasingly don’t see the federal government as a place where they can make a difference or make a career.”

“All of us depend on the government, and the government depends on a pipeline of skilled workers,” Kettl added. “The administration’s efforts have blown up the pipeline, and the costs will continue for years — probably decades — to come.”

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Unlike eight previous attempts to remove the president, almost all legislative factions expressed support for the move.

Peru’s Congress has voted to remove President Dina Boluarte, among the world’s most unpopular leaders, in a late-night session called hours after political parties from across the spectrum called for her impeachment, as the nation fights an intensive crime wave.

Politicians voted late Thursday into Friday to debate her removal from office on grounds of “moral incapacity” and summoned her to defend herself before Congress an hour later.

The stunning turn of events came just hours after a shooting at a concert in the capital inflamed anger over crime roiling the South American nation.

Legislators had voted to accept four requests for a vote to remove Boluarte from office over what they said was her government’s inability to stem crime. They exceeded the minimum 56 votes required for each request, setting up a debate and impeachment trial in the 130-member unicameral Congress.

They then requested that Boluarte come before them on Thursday shortly before midnight to defend herself, but when she did not appear, they immediately voted to oust her. In short order, 124 lawmakers voted just past midnight to impeach Boluarte.

Unlike eight previous attempts to remove her, almost all legislative factions expressed support for the latest requests.

Congratulations are in order for President Trump. He said he would bring home Israel’s hostages and end the horrific fighting in Gaza, and that appears to be exactly what he is doing with this week’s deal. While many of the ideas that went into Trump’s 20-point peace plan predated his reelection, he and his team deserve a standing ovation for translating those ideas into a practical proposal, defining a first phase that was both big and digestible and putting together all the pieces that made its agreement possible.

Success, however, does have its downsides. Remember the Pottery Barn rule of foreign policy, made famous during the Iraq war? “You break it, you own it.” We now have the Trump corollary: “You patch it, you own it.”

Despite coming to office eager to shed America’s Middle East commitments, Trump just took on a huge one: responsibility for a peace plan that will forever bear his name. On Oct. 6, 2023, the day before Hamas’ assault, Arab-Israeli relations were poised for the historic breakthrough of Saudi-Israel normalization; two years later, Arab-Israeli relations — including Trump’s first-term Middle East peacemaking achievement of the Abraham Accords — are hanging on by a thread. By offering a plan that promises not just an end to fighting in Gaza but building a full and enduring regional peace, the president has taken on the task of repairing the damage wrought by Hamas’ unholy war. In other words: fixing the Middle East.

How Trump fulfills this not inconsequential responsibility has major consequences for America’s role in the region and in the world. The Chinese are watching whether, when the going gets rough, he will have the mettle to maintain a broad alliance. The Russians are watching whether the president will strictly enforce the letter of the deal or let certain unpleasant aspects slip. The Iranians will be watching whether Trump will find himself so drowning in the details of Gaza reconstruction that he won’t be able to stitch together a repeat of the highly successful Arab-Israeli coalition that protected Israel a year ago from Iran’s barrages of ballistic missiles and drones. And all these adversaries — and others — will wonder whether the intense U.S. focus needed to ensure implementation of this deal will distract the president from their own areas of mischief.

Those are some of the international stakes. There’s a difficult road ahead in achieving the deal itself. Some of the most vexing challenges will include:

• Implementing a highly complex Gaza peace plan that, in its requirements for disarmament, envisions Hamas to be fully complicit in its organizational suicide — or at least its institutional castration;
• Having the U.S. military orchestrate the recruitment, deployment and management of multinational forces to police the territory just as the Israel Defense Forces are withdrawing from it, a tricky maneuver fraught with risk;
• Creating and supervising a transitional administration that will oversee everything from humanitarian relief to rubble and ordnance removal to massive reconstruction projects, all the while preventing what’s left of Hamas from stealing goods to divert to underground weapons factories, an art that it perfected after previous ceasefires;
• Securing buy-in from the United Nations and its specialized agencies, which need to play an essential role in delivering food and medical services, without buckling under pressure to rehabilitate the deeply flawed U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, an organization that bears special responsibility for keeping the Palestinian-Israeli conflict alive for decades;
• Preventing Qatar and Turkey — longtime friends of Hamas who have emerged in recent weeks as diplomatic Good Samaritans — from translating their current status into a malign influence over the direction of Palestinian politics, which can only be worrisome to Israel and the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority and a long-term detriment to the cause of peace;
• And dealing every step of the way with an Israeli prime minister of a rightist coalition who will likely view every decision, great and small, through the lens of a fateful election he is expected to call very soon that will show whether the Israeli people want to punish him for the terrible errors that left Israel unprepared for Hamas’ 2023 attack or reward him for the impressive victories Israel’s military achieved across the region in the two years that followed.

Getting this far was a huge achievement. Ensuring effective execution — never a strong suit for a “big idea guy” like Trump — is a thousand times more difficult. This can’t be done with a small team of White House officials chatting on Signal. It will require an army of — please excuse the term — experts: experts in military command and control, experts in ordnance removal and disposal, experts in civilian rehabilitation and reconstruction, experts in communication and community engagement. Corporate subcontracting can address some of this, as can the impressive talents of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, but don’t be fooled into thinking that a consulting company or a former foreign official can pick up the slack of the entire U.S. government. This plan, after all, has Trump’s name on it, not Deloitte’s or Blair’s.

The president has at least one more vital task in this matter. He must explain to the American people why we are doing this. For nearly 20 years, American presidents of both parties have said they wanted to pivot away from the Middle East, but they continually find themselves entangled in the region’s often byzantine conflicts and politics. Americans deserve to know why the “America First” president has decided that American interests are intimately bound up in the success of this peace plan. Our domestic divisions notwithstanding, fair-minded people on both sides of the aisle will be rooting for Trump’s success in this peace deal.

For now, sure, the president should enjoy the accolades and celebrate the coming release of Hamas’ hostages. The morning after will come soon enough.

Robert Satloff is executive director of the Washington Institute.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals appears poised to recognize President Trump’s authority to send soldiers to Portland, Ore., with members of the court signaling receptiveness to an expansive new read of the president’s power to put boots on the ground in American cities.

A three-judge panel from the appellate court — including two members appointed by Trump during his first term — heard oral arguments Thursday after Oregon challenged the legality of the president’s order to deploy hundreds of soldiers to Portland. The administration claims the city has become lawless; Oregon officials argue Trump is manufacturing a crisis to justify calling in the National Guard.

While the court has not issued a decision, a ruling in Trump’s favor would mark a sharp rightward turn for the once-liberal circuit — and probably set up a Supreme Court showdown over why and how the U.S. military can be used domestically.

“I’m sort of trying to figure out how a district court of any nature is supposed to get in and question whether the president’s assessment of ‘executing the laws’ is right or wrong,” said Judge Ryan D. Nelson of Idaho Falls, Idaho, one of the two Trump appointees hearing the arguments.

“That’s an internal decision making, and whether there’s a ton of protests or low protests, they can still have an impact on his ability to execute the laws,” he said.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut of Portland, another Trump appointee, previously called the president’s justification for federalizing Oregon troops “simply untethered to the facts” in her temporary restraining on Oct. 4.

The facts about the situation on the ground in Portland were not in dispute at the hearing on Thursday. The city has remained mostly calm in recent months, with protesters occasionally engaging in brief skirmishes with authorities stationed outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building.

Instead, Nelson and Judge Bridget S. Bade of Phoenix, whom Trump once floated as a possible Supreme Court nominee, questioned how much the facts mattered.

“The president gets to direct his resources as he deems fit, and it seems a little counterintuitive to me that the city of Portland can come and say, ‘No you need to do it differently,’” Nelson said.

He also appeared to endorse the Department of Justice’s claim that “penalizing” the president for waiting until protests had calmed to deploy soldiers to quell them created a perverse incentive to act first and ask questions later.

“It just seems like such a tortured reading of the statute,” the judge said. He then referenced the first battle of the U.S. Civil War in 1861, saying, “I’m not sure even President Lincoln would be able to bring in forces when he did, because if he didn’t do it immediately after Fort Sumter, [Oregon’s] argument would be, ‘Oh, things are OK now.’”

Trump’s efforts to use troops to quell protests and support federal immigration operations have led to a growing tangle of legal challenges. The Portland deployment was halted by Immergut, who blocked Trump from federalizing Oregon troops. (A ruling from the same case issued the next day prevents already federalized troops from being deployed.)

In June, a different 9th Circuit panel also made up of two Trump appointees ruled that the president had broad — though not “unreviewable” — discretion to determine whether facts on the ground met the threshold for military response in Los Angeles. Thousands of federalized National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines were deployed over the summer amid widespread protests over immigration enforcement.

The June decision set precedent for how any future deployment in the circuit’s vast territory can be reviewed. It also sparked outrage, both among those who oppose armed soldiers patrolling American streets and those who support them.

Opponents argue repeated domestic deployments shred America’s social fabric and trample protest rights protected by the 1st Amendment. With soldiers called into action so far in Los Angeles, Portland and Chicago, many charge the administration is using the military for political purposes.

“The military should not be acting as a domestic police force in this country except in the most extreme circumstances,” said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice. “That set of circumstances is not present right now anywhere in the country, so this is an abuse of power — and a very dangerous one because of the precedent it sets.”

Supporters say the president has sole authority to determine the facts on the ground and if they warrant military intervention. They argue any check by the judicial branch is an illegal power grab, aimed at thwarting response to a legitimate and growing “invasion from within.”

“What they’ve done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles — they’re very unsafe places, and we’re going to straighten them out one by one,” Trump said in an address to military top brass last week. “That’s a war too. It’s a war from within.”

The 9th Circuit agreed to rehear the Los Angeles case with an 11-member “en banc” panel in Pasadena on Oct. 22, signaling a schism among Trump’s own judges over the boundaries of the president’s power.

Still, Trump’s authority to call soldiers into American cities is only the first piece in a larger legal puzzle spread before the 9th Circuit, experts said.

What federalized troops are allowed to do once deployed is the subject of another court decision now under review. That case could determine whether soldiers are barred from assisting immigration raids, controlling crowds of protesters or any other form of civilian law enforcement.

Trump officials have maintained the president can wield the military as he sees fit — and that cities such as Portland and L.A. would be in danger if soldiers can’t come to the rescue.

“These are violent people, and if at any point we let down our guard, there is a serious risk of ongoing violence,” Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Eric McArthur said. “The president is entitled to say enough is enough and bring in the National Guard.”

WASHINGTON — A president looking to seize power beyond the executive branch. A Congress controlled by Republican lawmakers unwilling to directly defy him. And a minority party looking for any way to fight back.

The dynamic left Washington in a stalemate Thursday — the ninth day of the government shutdown — and lawmakers openly venting their frustration as they tried to gain traction without the trust that is typically the foundation of any bipartisan deal.

“To have good-faith conversations, you have to have trust. There’s a real challenge of trust,” said Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the New Democratic Coalition, a pragmatic group of House Democrats.

Groups of lawmakers — huddled over dinners, on phone calls, and in private meetings — have tried to brainstorm ways out of the standoff that has shuttered government offices, kept hundreds of thousands of federal employees at home and threatened to leave them without a scheduled payday. But lawmakers have found themselves running up against the reality that the relationship between the two parties is badly broken.

The frustration was evident this week as House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, on separate occasions, engaged in tense exchanges in the Capitol hallways with members of the opposing party.

“We’re in an environment where we need more than a handshake,” said Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat who has engaged in talks with Republicans.

President Trump and Republicans have so far held to the stance that they will only negotiate on Democratic demands around health care benefits after they vote to reopen the government. They also say Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer is beholden to the left wing of his party and only staging the shutdown fight to stave off a primary challenge.

Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Punchbowl News in an interview that Democrats were winning the shutdown fight, saying, “Every day gets better for us.”

Republicans quickly seized on those comments, arguing it showed that Schumer is approaching the shutdown with purely political motives.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune stood on the Senate floor flanked by a poster printed with Schumer’s words.

“This isn’t a political game. Democrats might feel that way, but I don’t know anybody else that does,” said Thune, a South Dakota Republican. “The longer this goes on, the more the American people realize that Democrats own this shutdown.”

Schumer, in his own floor speech, responded that it was Trump and Republicans who are “playing with people’s lives.”

“Every day that Republicans refuse to negotiate to end this shutdown, the worse it gets for Americans and the clearer it becomes who is fighting for them,” said the New York senator.

When a handshake deal is not enough

Democrats have insisted they can’t take Trump at his word and therefore need more than a verbal commitment for any deal.

Conflicts over spending power had already been raging before the shutdown as the White House pushed to assert maximum power over congressionally approved budgets. The White House budget office had canceled scores of government contracts, including cutting out the legislative branch entirely with a $4.9 billion cut to foreign aid in August through a legally dubious process known as a “pocket rescission.”

That enraged Democrats — and disturbed some Republicans who criticized it as executive overreach.

“I hate rescissions, to be honest with you, unless they’re congressionally approved,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican.

Matt Glassman, a fellow at the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University, said the president’s use of rescissions was “blowing up the underlying dynamic of the bargaining” because it inserts intense partisanship into the budget appropriations process that otherwise requires compromise, particularly in the Senate.

Then, as the government entered a shutdown, Trump’s budget director Russ Vought laid out arguments that the president would have even more power to lay off workers and even cancel pay due to furloughed federal workers once the funding lapse is solved. Vought has also announced that the administration was withholding billions of dollars for infrastructure projects in states with Democratic senators who have voted for the shutdown.

Trump has cast Vought’s actions as the consequences of Democratic obstruction, even sharing a video that depicted him as the grim reaper. But on Capitol Hill, there has been an acknowledgment that the hardball tactics are making it harder to negotiate.

“I think with senators, carrots work better than sticks,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican.

One Democratic idea may win GOP support

Before they vote to reopen the government, Democrats’ main demand is that Congress take up an extension of tax credits for health plans offered on Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Trump has sounded open to a deal, saying that he wants “great health care” for Americans.

What’s received less attention is that Democrats also want new safeguards in the law limiting the White House’s ability to claw back, or rescind, funding already approved by Congress. While final appropriations bills are still being worked out, Republicans have been open to the idea.

“When you end the shutdown and get back to regular order within the appropriations bills, there’s very clear language about how we feel about rescissions,” said Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “I think you’ll find hard, solid support from Republicans to see that what we agree to will be executed on.”

In the meantime, the main sticking point for lawmakers this week has been finding any agreement on extending the health care subsidies.

The consequences of an extended shutdown

As the shutdown drags on without sign of significant progress to ending the impasse, lawmakers are looking ahead to the dates when federal employees will miss a payday.

Active-duty military troops would miss a paycheck on Oct. 15. Some lawmakers are getting nervous about both the financial implications for the troops and the political blowback of allowing soldiers to go without pay.

As House Speaker Mike Johnson fielded questions on C-SPAN Thursday morning, one caller pleaded with him to pass legislation that would allow the military to get paid during the government shutdown.

The woman, identified as Samantha, said her husband serves in the military and that they “live paycheck to paycheck.”

She pleaded with Johnson to call the House back to Washington, saying, “You could stop this.”

Johnson said he was sorry to hear about her situation, blamed Democrats for refusing to pass a stop-gap spending bill and added, “I am angry because of situations just like yours.”

Groves, Jalonick and Brown write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro, Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

A United States military build-up and strikes on boats near Venezuela.

President Donald Trump says he’s targeting drug gangs – without presenting evidence.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro says he’ll stand up to Washington, with his country now on high alert.

So, what’s next?

Presenter: Nick Clark

Guests:

Elias Ferrer – Founder of Orinoco Research, a consulting company in Caracas

Paola Bautista de Aleman – Politician, member of the Venezuelan opposition in exile

Temir Porras– Managing Director at Global Sovereign Advisory

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Former FBI Director James Comey pleaded not guilty Wednesday to face a criminal case that has thrown a spotlight on the Justice Department’s efforts to target adversaries of President Trump.

The arraignment is expected to be brief, but the moment is nonetheless loaded with significance given that the case has amplified concerns the Justice Department is being weaponized in pursuit of Trump’s political enemies and is operating at the behest of a White House determined to seek retribution for perceived wrongs against the president.

Comey entered a not guilty plea through his lawyer at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Va., to allegations that he lied to Congress five years go. The plea kick-starts a process of legal wrangling in which defense lawyers will almost certainly move to get the indictment dismissed before trial, possibly by arguing the case amounts to a selective or vindictive prosecution.

The indictment two weeks ago followed an extraordinary chain of events that saw Trump publicly implore Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey and other perceived adversaries. The Republican president also replaced the veteran attorney who had been overseeing the investigation with Lindsey Halligan, a White House aide who had never previously served as a federal prosecutor. Halligan rushed to file charges before a legal deadline lapsed despite warnings from other lawyers in the office that the evidence was insufficient for an indictment.

What the indictment says

The two-count indictment alleges that Comey made a false statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 30, 2020, by denying he had authorized an associate to serve as an anonymous source to the news media and that he obstructed a congressional proceeding. Comey has denied any wrongdoing and has said he was looking forward to a trial. The indictment does not identify the associate or say what information may have been discussed with the media, making it challenging to assess the strength of the evidence or to even fully parse the allegations.

Though an indictment is typically just the start of a protracted court process, the Justice Department has trumpeted the development itself as something of a win, regardless of the outcome. Trump administration officials are likely to point to any conviction as proof the case was well-justified, but an acquittal or even dismissal may also be held up as further support for their long-running contention the criminal justice system is stacked against them.

The judge was nominated by Biden

The judge randomly assigned to the case, Michael Nachmanoff, was nominated to the bench by President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration and is a former chief federal defender. Known for methodical preparation and a cool temperament, the judge and his background have already drawn Trump’s attention, with the president deriding him as a “Crooked Joe Biden appointed Judge.”

Besides Comey, the Justice Department is also investigating other foes of the president, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California.

Several Comey family members arrived in court Wednesday morning ahead of the arraignment, including his daughter Maurene, who was fired by the Justice Department earlier this year from her position as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan, as well as Troy Edwards Jr., a son-in-law of Comey’s who minutes after Comey was indicted resigned his job as a prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia — the same office that filed the charges.

Trump and Comey’s fraught relationship

The indictment was the latest chapter in a long-broken relationship between Trump and Comey.

Trump arrived in office in January 2017 as Comey, appointed to the FBI director job by President Obama four years earlier, was overseeing an investigation into ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The dynamic was fraught from the start, with Comey briefing Trump weeks before he took office on the existence of uncorroborated and sexually salacious gossip in a dossier of opposition research compiled by a former British spy.

In their first several private interactions, Comey would later reveal, Trump asked his FBI director to pledge his loyalty to him and to drop an FBI investigation into his administration’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn. Comey said Trump also asked him to announce that Trump himself was not under investigation as part of the broader inquiry into Russian election interference, something Comey did not do.

Comey was abruptly fired in May 2017 while at an event in Los Angeles, with Trump later saying he was thinking about “this Russia thing” when he decided to terminate him. The firing was investigated by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller as an act of potential obstruction of justice.

Comey in 2018 published a memoir, “A Higher Loyalty,” that painted Trump in deeply unflattering ways, likening him to a mafia don and characterizing him as unethical and “untethered to truth.”

Trump, for his part, continued to angrily vent at Comey as the Russia investigation led by Mueller dominated headlines for the next two years and shadowed his first administration. On social media, he repeatedly claimed Comey should face charges for “treason” — an accusation Comey dismissed as “dumb lies” — and called him an “untruthful slime ball.”

Tucker, Richer and Kunzelman write for the Associated Press. Tucker reported from Washington.

WASHINGTON  — Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi struck a defiant tone Tuesday during a Senate hearing where she dodged a series of questions about brewing scandals that have dogged her agency.

Bondi, a Trump loyalist, refused to discuss her conversations with the White House about the recent indictment of former FBI Director James Comey and the deployment of federal troops to Democrat-run cities.

She deflected questions about an alleged bribery scheme involving the president’s border advisor and declined to elaborate on her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

In many instances, Bondi’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee devolved into personal attacks against Democrats, who expressed dismay at their inability to get her to answer their inquiries.

“This is supposed to be an oversight hearing in which members of Congress can get serious answers to serious questions about the cover-up of corruption about the prosecution of the president’s enemies,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said toward the end of the nearly five-hour hearing. “When will it be that the members of this committee on a bipartisan basis demand answers to those questions?”

Her testimony came as the Justice Department faces increased accusations that it is being weaponized against President Trump’s political foes.

It marked a continuation of what has become a hallmark of not just Bondi, but most of Trump’s top officials. When pressed on potential scandals that the president has taken great pains to publicly avoid, they almost universally turn to one tactic: ignore and attack the questioner.

That strategy was shown in an exchange between Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), who wanted to know who decided to close an investigation into Trump border advisor Tom Homan. Homan reportedly accepted $50,000 in cash from undercover FBI agents after indicating he could get them government contracts. Bondi declined to say and shifted the focus to Padilla.

“I wish that you loved your state of California as much as you hate President Trump,” Bondi said. “We’d be in really good shape then because violent crime in California is currently 35% higher than the national average.”

In between partisan attacks, the congressional hearing allowed Bondi to boast about her eight months in office. She said her focus has been on combating illegal immigration, violent crime and restoring public trust in the Justice Department, which she said Biden-era officials weaponized against Trump.

“They wanted to take President Trump off the playing field,” she said about the effort to indict Trump. “This is the kind of conduct that shatters the American people’s faith in our law enforcement system. We will work to earn that back every single day. We are returning to our core mission of fighting real crime.”

She defended the administration’s deployment of federal troops to Washington, D.C., and Chicago, where she said troops had been sent on Tuesday. Bondi declined to say whether the White House consulted her on the deployment of troops to American cities but said the effort is meant to “protect” citizens from violent crime.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) asked about the legal justification for the military shooting vessels crossing the Carribbean Sea off Venezuela. The administration has said the boats are carrying drugs, but Coons told Bondi that “Congress has never authorized such a use of military force.”

“It’s unclear to me how the administration has concluded that the strikes are legal,” Coons said.

Bondi told Coons she would not discuss the legal advice her department has given to the president on the matter but said Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro “is a narcoterrorist,” and that “drugs coming from Venezuela are killing our children at record levels.”

Coons said he was “gravely concerned” that she was not leading a department that is making decisions that are in “keeping with the core values of the Constitution.” As another example, he pointed to Trump urging her to prosecute his political adversaries, such as Comey.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) the top Democrat on the committee, raised a similar concern at the beginning of the hearing, saying Bondi has “systematically weaponized our nation’s leading law enforcement agency to protect President Trump and his allies.”

“In eight short months, you have fundamentally transformed the Justice Department and left an enormous stain on American history,” Durbin said. “It will take decades to recover.”

A government official in Ecuador has accused protesters of attempting to attack President Daniel Noboa, alleging that a group of approximately 500 people surrounded his vehicle and threw rocks.

The attack, which unfolded in the south-central province of Canar, took place as Noboa arrived in the canton of El Tambo for an event about water treatment and sewage.

Environment and Energy Minister Ines Manzano said Noboa’s car showed “signs of bullet damage”. In a statement to the press, she explained that she filed a report alleging an assassination attempt had taken place.

“Shooting at the president’s car, throwing stones, damaging state property — that’s just criminal,” Manzano said. “We will not allow this.”

The president’s office also issued a statement after the attack on Tuesday, pledging to pursue accountability against those involved.

“Obeying orders to radicalise, they attacked a presidential motorcade carrying civilians. They attempted to forcibly prevent the delivery of a project intended to improve the lives of a community,” the statement, published on social media, said.

“All those arrested will be prosecuted for terrorism and attempted murder,” it added.

Five people, according to Manzano, have been detained following the incident. Noboa was not injured.

Video published by the president’s office online shows Noboa’s motorcade navigating a roadway lined with protesters, some of whom picked up rocks and threw them at the vehicles, causing fractures to form on the glass.

A separate image showed a silver SUV with a shattered passenger window and a shattered windscreen. It is not clear from the images whether a bullet had been fired.

Noboa, Ecuador’s youngest-ever president, was re-elected in April after a heated run-off election against left-wing rival Luisa Gonzalez.

May marked the start of his first full term in office. Previously, Noboa, a conservative candidate who had only served a single term in the National Assembly, had been elected to serve the remainder of Guillermo Lasso’s term — a period of around 18 months — after the former president dissolved his government.

Combatting crime has been a centrepiece of Noboa’s pitch for the presidency. Ecuador, formerly considered an “island of peace” in South America, has seen a spike in homicide rates as criminal organisations seek to expand their drug trafficking routes through the country.

Ecuador’s economy has also struggled to recover following the COVID-19 pandemic.

But Noboa has faced multiple protests since taking office.

In recent weeks, for example, he has faced outcry over his decision to end a fuel subsidy that critics say helps lower-income families.

Noboa’s government, however, has argued that the subsidy drove up government costs without reaching those who need it. In a presidential statement on September 12, officials accused the subsidy of being “diverted to smuggling, illegal mining and undue benefits”.

The statement also said that the subsidies represented $1.1bn that could instead be used to compensate small farmers and transportation workers directly.

But the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE), the country’s most powerful Indigenous advocacy organisation, launched a strike in response to the news of the subsidy’s end.

It called upon its supporters to lead protests and block roadways as a way of expressing their outrage.

Nevertheless, on Tuesday, the group denied that there had been an organised attack on Noboa’s motorcade. Instead, CONAIE argued that government violence had been “orchestrated” against the people who had gathered to protest Noboa.

“We denounce that at least five comrades have been arbitrarily detained,” CONAIE posted on X. “Among the attacked are elderly women.”

It noted that Tuesday marked the 16th day of protest. “The people are not the enemy,” it added.

CONAIE had largely backed Noboa’s rival Gonzalez in the April election, though some of its affiliate groups splintered in favour of Noboa.

This is not the first time that Noboa’s government has claimed the president was the target of an assassination attempt.

In April, shortly after the run-off vote, it issued a “maximum alert” claiming that assassins had entered the country from Mexico to destabilise his administration.

At the time, the administration blamed “sore losers” from the election for fomenting the alleged plot.

President Trump has often locked horns with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, with the once left-leaning court putting a persistent drag on his first-term agenda.

And now, even after remaking the bench with his own appointees, the president is still tangling with the West Coast’s federal appellate court — a situation poised to boil over as the circuit juggles multiple challenges to his use of the National Guard to police American streets.

“I appointed the judge and he goes like that — I wasn’t served well,” Trump told reporters Sunday, lashing out at U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut of Portland after she temporarily blocked the deployment federalized troops.

“To have a judge like that, that judge ought to be ashamed of himself,” Trump said, referring to Immergut, who is a woman.

The president has long railed against judges who rule against him, calling them “monsters,” “deranged,” and “radical” at various points in the past.

Trump has also occasionally sniped at conservative jurists, including U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, whom he called “disgraceful” after the court rejected his bid to overturn the 2020 election.

But this weekend’s spat marked a shift in his willingness to go after his own appointees — a turn experts say could become much sharper as his picks to the appellate bench test his ambition to put boots on the ground in major cities across the U.S.

“The fact that a pretty conservative judge ruled the way she did is an indication that some conservative judges would rule similarly,” said Ilya Somin, a law professor at George Mason University and a constitutional scholar at the Cato Institute.

The 9th Circuit handed the administration an early victory in the troop fight this spring, finding that courts must give “a great level of deference” to the president to decide whether facts on the ground warrant military intervention.

That ruling is set to be reviewed by a larger appellate panel, and could ultimately be reversed. The circuit is also now set to review a September decision barring federalized troops in California from aiding in civilian law enforcement, as well as Immergut’s temporary restraining order blocking the deployment over the weekend.

In the meantime, the 9th Circuit’s June decision has served as a guidepost for states seeking to limit what Oregon called a “nationwide campaign to assimilate the military into civilian law enforcement.”

“That decision is binding, and it does require a substantial degree of deference on the factual issues,” Somin said. “[But] when what the president does is totally divorced from reality, that limit is breached.”

Immergut appeared to agree, saying in her ruling that circumstances in Portland this fall were significantly different than those in L.A. in the spring. While some earlier protests did turn violent, she wrote, recent pickets outside Portland’s ICE headquarters have featured lawn chairs and low energy.

“Violence elsewhere cannot support troop deployments here, and concern about hypothetical future conduct does not demonstrate a present inability to execute the laws using nonmilitary federal law enforcement,” the judge wrote, addressing the 9th Circuit decision.

“The President is certainly entitled ‘a great level of deference,’” Immergut continued. “But ‘a great level of deference’ is not equivalent to ignoring the facts on the ground. … The President’s determination was simply untethered to the facts.”

But exactly where the appellate court may draw the line on presidential fact-finding is tricky, experts said.

“How much deference is owed to the president? That’s something we’re all talking about,” said John C. Dehn, a professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

Whether courts can review the president’s judgment at all is a matter that splits even some of the president’s most conservative judicial picks from his current justice department attorneys.

So far, Trump has relied on an esoteric subsection of the U.S. Code for the authority to send soldiers on immigration raids and to control crowds of protesters.

Dehn and others have characterized that reading of the code as semantic and divorced from its legal context.

“They’re looking at the words in a vacuum and arguing the broadest possible meaning they could can think of,” Dehn said. “The administration is not engaged in good faith statutory interpretation — they’re engaged in linguistic manipulation of these statues.”

Immegur agreed, quoting Supreme Court precedent saying “[i]nterpretation of a word or phrase depends upon reading the whole statutory text.”

For some conservative legal scholars, Trump appointees’ willingness to push back on repeated deployments could signal a limit — or a dangerous new escalation in the administration’s attacks on jurists who defy them.

“It’s obvious the administration is trying to do this on a bigger scale,” Somin said. “Ideally we would not rely on litigation alone to deal with it.”